IMMACULATE HEART COLLEGE

Through Mary to Jesus: “The Way, the Truth and the Life” John 14:6

2016 NAPLAN REPORT

September 2016

2016 NAPLAN Report

Brief Historical Background In May 2012, as a Kindergarten to Year 3 (K-3) school, Immaculate Heart College (IHC) offered the National Assessment Program for Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) to its inaugural Year 3 students. At the time, there were only three Year 3 students and all three sat the Test. In May 2013, as a K-4 school, eight out of nine Year 3 students sat the NAPLAN. The one student who did not sit the Test was legitimately absent from school that week. In May 2014, as a K-5 school, eight out of eight Year 3 students and nine out of ten Year 5 students sat the NAPLAN. The one Year 5 student who did not sit the Test was withdrawn from the Test by his parent. In May 2015, as a K-6 school, seven out of seven Year 3 students, and seven out of seven Year 5 students sat the NAPLAN. The 2016 online data appraisal tool for NAPLAN for Independent (AISWA) Schools is called Valuate.

This Report shows the mean scores for IHC (School Mean), for Year 3 and Year 5 respectively, as well as the State Mean and the National Mean. Comparisons are then made against the State Mean and the National Mean, and recommendations follow.

AISWA identifies up to 15 ‘Like Schools’ for each of its Western Australian schools. ‘Like Schools’ are based on criteria such as Index of Community Socio-Educational Advantage (ICSEA) value, gender of school, boarding facilities, metropolitan location, faith, and other criteria. Interestingly, there are no ‘Like Schools’ listed for IHC. If, however, there were ‘Like Schools’ for IHC, then the students’ performances in the NAPLAN could also be measured against those of the ‘Like Schools’.

Important Considerations Re; the NAPLAN Before providing the overall average results (School Mean) of the NAPLAN for Year 3 and Year 5 at IHC in 2016, it is important to consider the following key points:

• NAPLAN data tells a story over time; that is, data over 1, 2 or 3 years does not tell a story. Data over a 10 year period does tell a story. This is because data will vary from year to year. The real improvement is evident over time.

• NAPLAN data is represented by Bands for each year group. These Bands demonstrate the ‘spread’ that is everywhere; in every class, in every school, in every place. This ‘spread’ is normal.

• The Bands correlate generally with the following year-level

achievements:

NAPLAN Year Bands Actual Year Level Achievement -Year 3: Band 2 Late Pre-pri/Beginning Year 1 -Year 5: Band 4 Late Year 2/Beginning Year 3 -Year 7: Band 5 Year 4 -Year 9: Band 6 End of Year 5

• Hence, NAPLAN Bands for each year level represent the national minimum standards for Reading, Writing, Language Conventions, and Numeracy.

• Working ‘At’ or ‘Below’ the correlating Bands for a given Year level is working at a relatively low level of achievement.

• Working ‘Above’, if it is ‘just above’, is also problematic.

• Working ‘Above’, if it is ‘well above’, is acceptable but does not mean that schools should not aim to further improve the standard of education on offer.

• The NAPLAN is based on about 90% of the Australian Curriculum (AC). Hence, if the AC is taught well, students should do well in the NAPLAN. On the other hand, schools that teach to the NAPLAN Tests will find that students decline in their performance in the NAPLAN over time.

• It is what schools DO with the data that matters most. It should be used

to prepare teachers and students appropriately, and to develop a culture of inquiry and drive for improvement. The data should be used to assist in developing strategies to improve teaching/learning outcomes.

• Instead, data is often abused, especially by the media. How the data is

interpreted matters.

• Data interpretation, leading to a culture of inquiry, is the preferred approach. This, in turn, leads to ACTION.

• The culture of inquiry will lead to:

1) Internal, diagnostic, problem-seeking measures; and 2) External, summarising, solution-reporting approaches.

• Progress made over time should be measured against the previous time. The question to be asked is: How much progress has been made and is it enough?

• NAPLAN data should confirm what a school/teacher already knows about a student. If it does not, then questions need to be asked.

• NAPLAN does not only test the learning that has taken place during the

Test year; it also tests the learning that has taken place before that year. Hence, for IHC, NAPLAN is testing the education received by the students in 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016. Where applicable, it is also testing the education received by students at their previous schools.

• Students who have English as a Second Language (ESL) may have trouble with literacy in the NAPLAN but they also may have trouble accessing Mathematics due to the ‘literacy of Mathematics’.

• The Numeracy NAPLAN Test is also a literacy test. As such, teachers need to change the way they teach Numeracy; that is, they need to include literacy in the teaching approach (i.e., Mathematics-literacy Approach).

• You cannot look at data in isolation. You need to look at the

background factors that affect a student’s performance on the day of the NAPLAN.

• NAPLAN adds to the picture we already have but, without the

background information, it is not enough and the data does not always make sense on its own.

• Significant gaps in inference in Reading are often as a result of what was

not taught in Kindergarten and/or Pre-primary.

• Any data that a school collects must be collected to give the school information to improve student learning. If the data is not gathered for this purpose, then there is no reason to collect it.

• In both Year 3 and Year 5 at Immaculate Heart College there exists

students who have been formerly identified with learning difficulties and as a result of small class sizes, the lower range scores of these children significantly effect our cohort averages against the State and National Averages.

Important Data Collection There are four areas of data collection that matter more than the NAPLAN. These are;

• School-based data and quality classroom assessments; • Attendance; • Behaviour; and • Student well-being.

Listed in priority order below are the school-based data and quality classroom assessments that inform us about our students, along with the percentage rate of accuracy of that data (proven through various studies and research):

1. Observation notes and checklists (95-98% accuracy) 2. Running Records (95-98% accuracy) 3. Peer and self-assessment (95-98% accuracy) 4. Comments, both written and oral (80% accuracy) 5. Group work, both formal and informal (80% accuracy) 6. Formative assessment, both formal and informal (80% accuracy) 7. Summative assessment (60% accuracy) 8. Common assessment tasks (60% accuracy) 9. Diagnostic and evaluative assessments (50-60% accuracy) 10. School-based standardised assessments (50-60% accuracy)

The above-listed assessment types are the BEST collection of data that a teacher and school can have. The NAPLAN should confirm what we already know about our students through the above-listed types of assessment and evaluation. Hence, if the NAPLAN results are anomalous for a particular student, then the teacher needs to check the other data sets to determine why the results were as such. Quality classroom assessment types are what schools should be aiming for; that is, schools should be developing their own benchmarks within the class so that students can then be mapped against these benchmarks. If the same skills, concepts and understandings are assessed over a period of time, then growth and progress of students can be mapped. The NAPLAN achieves three key things:

1) It demonstrates the trends of a school over time; that is, how well the school is teaching the AC;

2) It provides a nationally-based benchmark from which the school can compare its own progress; and

3) It helps in planning for subsequent years.

The ‘Valuate’ Tool Some key points regarding the ‘Valuate’ tool for NAPLAN data interpretation:

• The NAPLAN scale is 0-1,000 • The number that a student gets on his/her NAPLAN Report (i.e., 509) is

from that scale • A student can score zero; for example, a scribble on a NAPLAN Test is

considered an attempt at doing the Test; therefore, the score that registers is zero

• A student can score 1,000 (and some Year 9 students have achieved this score)

• The ‘Student Growth Chart’ shows the students’ average score in all sections of the NAPLAN Test over time

• 40-50 points’ improvement is the norm (more common) • 100 points’ improvement in 2 years is very good • 10 years are needed before a valid judgment can be made re; the data • Bands relate to the difficulty of the questions in the NAPLAN • At the end of Year 8, and in preparation for Year 9, it would be preferred

to have students performing at about Band 7 or 8 • A Year 9 student sitting ‘At’ or ‘Just Above’ Band 6 or 7 will have

difficulty accessing the WACE curriculum in Years 11 and 12 NAPLAN 2016 Overview from ACARA

Summary data released from the 2016 NAPLAN tests demonstrate that, compared with 2008 (the first year of NAPLAN), there have been gains in all content areas (except for writing), but not for all year groups.

On a national level:

-Reading Reading results for Years 3 and 5 saw significant gain compared with 2008. -Numeracy Numeracy results for Year 5 saw significant gain compared with 2008. -Spelling Spelling results for Year 3 saw significant gain compared with 2008.

-Grammar/punctuation Grammar/punctuation results for Year 3 saw significant gain compared with 2008 -Writing Writing results for Years 7 and 9 saw a significant decrease since 2011 (the year from which results can be compared for this domain).

There have been some significant gains in some domains in each state and territory, with Western Australia and Queensland standing out more than others.

NAPLAN is about driving improvement in schools across the country. The data allow us to celebrate success and identify areas for improvement. It also contributes to sharing of successful strategies within and across states and territories, with the goal of improving learning across the country.

The NAPLAN national results also show that from 2015 to 2016 there has been no significant change in literacy and numeracy results, with results plateauing.

We are concerned that, on a national level, the results have shown no significant improvement across the domains and year levels from 2015. Plateauing results are not what we should expect or assume from our education systems.

Literacy and numeracy are the foundation of learning in and beyond school. Literacy and numeracy achievement needs to improve to ensure the wellbeing of individual students and the country as a whole.

Chief Executive Officer of the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority, Robert Randall

IHC Year 3 Results for 2016 There were seven Year 3 students who sat the NAPLAN Testing. The following table shows the school’s NAPLAN averages for each of the Tests against those of the State, the Nation, and ‘Like Schools’. As stated previously, there are no ‘Like Schools’ listed for Immaculate Heart College. NAPLANAVERAGESFORYEAR32015

Numeracy Reading Writing Spelling Grammar&Punctuation

School 384 391 410 384 366

State 395 416 414 412 425

National 402 426 421 420 436

Similar‘LikeSchools’

0 0 0 0 0

Numeracy: The school’s average for Numeracy is 11 points lower than the State average and 18 points lower than the National average. The school’s highest achieving student (with a score of 495) was 100 points above the State average and 93 points above the National average. The school’s lowest achieving student (with a score of 316) was 79 points lower than the State average and 86 points lower than the National average. Reading: The school’s average for Reading is 25 points lower than the State average and 35 points lower than the National average. The school’s highest achieving student (with a score of 576) was 160 points above the State average and 150 points above the National average. The school’s lowest achieving student (with a score of 297) was 119 points lower than the State average and 129 points lower than the National average.

Writing: The school’s average for Writing is 4 points lower than the State average and 11 points lower than the National average. The school’s highest achieving student (with a score of 472) was 58 points above the State average and 51 points above the National average. The school’s lowest achieving student (with a score of 344) was 70 points lower than the State average and 77 points lower than the National average. Spelling: The school’s average for Spelling is 28 points lower than the State average and 36 points lower than the National average. The school’s highest achieving student (with a score of 464) was 52 points above the State average and 44 points above the National average. The school’s lowest achieving student (with a score of 272) was 140 points lower than the State average and 148 points lower than the National average. Grammar & Punctuation: The school’s average for Grammar and Punctuation is 59 points lower than the State average and 70 points lower than the National average. The school’s highest achieving student (with a score of 485) was 60 points above the State average and 49 points above the National average. The school’s lowest achieving student (with a score of 199) was 226 points lower that the State average and 237 points lower than the National average.

IHC Year 5 Results for 2016 The following table shows the school’s NAPLAN averages for each of the Tests against those of the State, the Nation, and ‘Like Schools’. As stated previously, there are no ‘Like Schools’ listed for Immaculate Heart College. NAPLANAVERAGESFORYEAR52016

Numeracy Reading Writing Spelling Grammar&Punctuation

School 462 466 459 493 505

State 486 495 470 488 499

National 493 502 475 493 505

Similar‘LikeSchools’

0 0 0 0 0

Numeracy: The school’s average for Numeracy is 24 points lower than the State average and 31 points lower than the National average. The school’s highest achieving student (with a score of 537) was 51 points above the State average and 44 points above the National average. The school’s lowest achieving student (with a score of 379) was 107 points lower than the State average and 114 points lower than the National average. Reading: The school’s average for Reading is 29 points lower than the State average and 36 points lower than the National average. The school’s highest achieving student (with a score of 549) was 54 points above the State average and 47 points above the National average. The school’s lowest achieving student (with a score of 413) was 82 points lower than the State average and 89 points lower than the National average. Writing: The school’s average for Writing is 11 points lower than the State average and 16 points lower than the National average. The school’s highest achieving student (with a score of 535) was 65 points above the State average and 60 points above the National average. The school’s lowest achieving

student (with a score of 402) was 68 points lower than the State average and 73 points lower than the National average. Spelling: The school’s average for Spelling is 5 points above the State average and equal to the National average. The school’s highest achieving student (with a score of 539) was 51 points above the State average and 46 points above the National average. The school’s lowest achieving student (with a score of 428) was 60 points lower that the State average and 65 points lower than the National average. Grammar & Punctuation: The school’s average for Grammar and Punctuation is 6 points above the State average and equal to the National average. The school’s highest achieving student (with a score of 592) was 93 points above the State average and 87 points above the National average. The school’s lowest achieving student (with a score of 432) was 67 points lower than the State average and 73 points lower than the National average.

Please note: For Spelling and Grammar & Punctuation, IHC is the same as the National Average

Planning Implications for Immaculate Heart College for 2016 & 2017

As a result of the NAPLAN data analysis, the following planning implications apply for the remainder of 2016 and for 2017:

• The College will continue to have a Literacy and Numeracy focus in 2016 and 2017, offering PL opportunities to all staff in both of these areas.

• The College has employed a full time Education Assistant in the 3/4 class in order to help with some students identified with Special Needs.

• The College will continue to offer one-on-one tuition in Literacy and Numeracy for students at risk.

• The College will continue to place an emphasis on reading, on building up its Library resources, and on embellishing the fiction and non-fiction literature resources in the school.

• The purchase of resources for Literacy and Numeracy, as well as all other Learning Areas will continue to be a priority.

• Teaching/Learning Programmes in all year levels from Pre-primary onwards will provide regular opportunity for students to use all forms of writing, including narrative, persuasive, and other forms.

• Explicit teaching will be used to teach the various forms of writing, including the narrative and persuasive forms.

• Students who are working at or below the minimum Achievement Standard of the AC; and/or at or below classroom and NAPLAN benchmarks will receive the Intervention Strategies known as Wave 1 (whole-class intervention), Wave 2 (small-group intervention), and Wave 3 (individual intervention), as necessary to the situation.

• Students with Special Needs will be considered for Wave 3 (individual intervention) with the Education Assistant-Special Needs.

• Triangulation of consultation from professional services including School Psychology Services, School Nurse, Education Assistant-Special Needs, etc., with the Principal, Teachers, Education Assistants, and Parents will continue to take place.

• English as Second Language (ESL) teaching/learning strategies will be implemented for all ESL students at the College (K-6) but also for all other students who can and will benefit from such strategies.

• Explicit teaching will continue to be implemented for literacy and numeracy skills.

• The Mathematics-literacy Approach will continue to be part of the teaching/learning of Mathematics across the school.

• The current Year 3/4 and Year 5/6 Class Teachers will analyse their students’ individual performances further via the Valuate ‘Student Profile’ tab and will implement appropriate teaching/learning strategies for improved performance over time.

• All IHC Teachers will be provided with key information regarding the College’s NAPLAN and other benchmark testing results so that every teacher can take responsibility and apply appropriate measures to improve student outcomes.

• The College will continue to triangulate and to analyse data; that is, school-based assessment, school-based diagnostic testing (i.e., common assessments), and standardised tests and past NAPLAN test papers.

• Action relating to the findings of the data analyses will continue to be a priority.

• ‘On Entry Assessment’ will continue for all Pre-primary students in 2017, which will continue to provide the platform from which to make appropriate teaching and learning decisions for improvement.

• An all-rounded, holistic, and well-balanced curriculum will continue to be offered at IHC, with a Christian (Catholic) ethos at its core.

Lucas Hurley Acting Principal 13 September 2016